2021 QCCA 1523, 2021 QCCA 1523

Iorio c. Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) 2021 QCCA 1523 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-029626-215 ( 500-17-117526-213 ) MINUTES OF HEARING DATE: September 30, 2021 THE HONOURABLE STÉPHANE SANSFAÇON, J.A.

APPLICANT Mario Iorio ABSENT AND Unrepresented RESPONDENT COUNSEL public service alliance of canada (PSAC) Mtre Daniel Bélanger ( MMGC ) Absent DESCRIPTION: Application for leave to appeal from a judgment terminating the proceeding rendered on July 26, 2021 by the Honourable Silvana Conte of the Superior Court , District of Montreal (Art. 30 para. 2 and 357 C.C.P. ) . Application to suspend the provisional execution (Art. 660 C.C.P. ) . Clerk at the hearing : Mélanie Camiré Courtroom: RC-18 HEARING Continuation of the hearing held on September 29th, 2021. The parties were excused from appearing in Court.

BY THE JUDGE: Judgment – see page 3.

Mélanie Camiré, Clerk at the hearing JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The applicant seeks leave to appeal a safeguard order made on July 26, 2021 by the Superior Court (the Honourable Madam Justice Silvana Conte), which ordered the applicant to destroy a list of contacts and contracts of members of the respondent’s Executive Committee, as well as a list of its members in any format in which it exists, and further ordered him to refrain from disclosing the confidential information set out in the order, which confidential information was obtained while the applicant was a member of the respondent’s Executive Committee or a delegate. [ 2 ] The order expired on September 2, 2021.

On that day, a new hearing was held before another judge, who made a new order, in addition to a case management order for the purpose of accelerating the proceedings. * * * [ 3 ] Leave to appeal a safeguard order will be granted only under exceptional circumstances and provided the criteria set out in

article 31 C.C.P. have been satisfied, taking into account the best interests of justice and the guiding principles of procedure [1] It will be granted only if the judgment has an apparent defect and there is an urgent need to avoid significant or undue harm to one of the parties [2] In Lavoie , this Court stated the following on this subject: La permission d’appeler d’une ordonnance de sauvegarde ne sera accordée que dans des circonstances exceptionnelles et si les critères prévus à l’article 31 C.p.c. sont remplis, en tenant compte du meilleur intérêt de la justice et des principes directeurs de la procédure. [Emphasis in original; references omitted] [ 4 ] It is important to note the exceptional nature of a leave to appeal from a safeguard order: Leave to appeal in matters involving a provisional interlocutory injunction or a safeguard order will be granted only under exceptional circumstances .

As a general rule, leave will be granted only where the contested judgment has a prima facie defect and there is an urgent need to avoid significant harm . Given the discretionary nature of the judge’s order, the Court’s intervention must be limited to determining whether the discretion was exercised judicially, free of any palpable and overriding error. [Emphasis in original; references omitted] [ 5 ] Thus, because safeguard orders are discretionary, temporary and reviewable at all times and, ultimately, in all cases in the judgment on the merits, they are not considered appealable within the meaning of

article 31 C.C.P., except, as previously stated, under exceptional circumstances. [ 6 ] In the present matter, the applicant has not shown any exceptional circumstances, nor has he shown that the judgment has an apparent defect. [ 7 ] Moreover, the impugned safeguard order expired on September 2, 2021, such that any appeal is moot.

Any other safeguard order made subsequent to the impugned one is a separate order and cannot simply be viewed as an extension of the first one, even if, in fact, its effect is to maintain an order against the applicant [3] FOR THESE REASONS, THE UNDERSIGNED: [ 8 ] DISIMISSES the application for leave to appeal, with legal costs. [ 9 ] DISMISSES the application to suspend the provisional execution, without costs. STÉPHANE SANSFAÇON, J.A.